- 4 -
private letter ruling to the effect that petitioner was self-
employed during the years in question. The Appeals officer
agreed to “stay” the collection process while petitioner sought a
ruling. Approximately 1 week later, the Appeals officer received
a copy of petitioner’s request for a private letter ruling. The
Appeals officer assumed that petitioner had submitted the
original of the request for a private letter ruling to the
appropriate Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ruling branch.
The Appeals officer heard nothing further from or about
petitioner until November 2000, when he received notification
from within the IRS that an examination of petitioner’s
employment status had been conducted and resulted in the
conclusion that petitioner was an employee during the years in
question. That determination had been made by respondent’s
specialized examination group in Vermont that considers whether
taxpayers are employees or independent contractors. It was at
that time (more than 6 months after his telephone conversation
with petitioner) that the Appeals officer discovered that
petitioner had not sought a private letter ruling, but had
instead submitted a request for examination of his status. After
receiving the notification during December 2000, the Appeals
officer caused the issuance of the notice of determination to
proceed with the levy, from which petitioner appealed to this
Court.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011